Live data from Hacker News

Shall we fork Debian?

debianfork.org

111–120 of 284 posts

Re: Shall we fork Debian?

#111
post #105
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way Lennart interacted with the speaker during that talk was extremely inappropriate. If he had corrections to make he could have arranged a short talk afterwards or a written blog post. It is very poor form to be so disruptive to a speaker, no matter how much you disagree with them.

No it isn't.. being on a soap box doesn't give you some special permission to just spread false information without being interrupted. I heard this argument before, there was an article about book reviews, and that authors who interacted with reviewers (by writing on their own blogs about them or on twitter) would be labeled Bad Behaving Author and be shunned by the review community. What's up with that? If someone t…

> being on a soap box

Let's get this straight: he's not on a soap box (a term that refers to people who shout at passers by on the street), but rather at a conference at which he was invited to speak. The audience came into the room to hear him give his talk. Lennart rudely interrupted this.

> I heard this argument before, there was an article about book reviews, and that authors who interacted with reviewers (by writing on their own blogs about them or on twitter) would be labeled Bad Behaving Author and be shunned by the review community.

That's not my argument at all. I specifically suggested he _should_ respond with a blog post. Don't put me in the same group as those people. I encourage anyone to share their views on their own blogs, in comment sections, and on Twitter.

> If someone talks shit, he should be challenged as soon as possible, preferably in front of the same crowd they are talking shit in front of.

I disagree that it is appropriate to interrupt and shout someone down just because you think they are "talking shit". The definition of "talking shit" is subjective. If someone is interrupted before they can make their point, then the observer does not have the ability to judge whether they are right or wrong. It instead becomes a matter of whoever has the best rhetorical tactics. (Or who can shout the loudest.)

My job involves giving a lot of talks, and if someone were to engage with me like this I _would_ be prepared: I'd be prepared to tell them to wait until I have finished my talk and address their comments afterward. This has happened many times, and it worked out fine for all involved. It's called civility.

Re: Shall we fork Debian?

#112
post #98
post #72

I'm a devop, not a system administrator. I setup and administered a number of single machine web services for my customers along the years, almost all of them with Debian plus some Ubuntus recently. Database, application server, web server. Nothing fancy. I also use Ubuntu as my primary desktop (some sort of gnome fallback DE) after I removed a lot of cruft if comes with by default. From my experience what I need on…

You're spreading FUD. So I can imagine having very different init systems for desktops and servers if this means that the server won't be encumbered by a number subsystems which are of no use to it. systemd is about choice ;-) Only use the subsystems that you need. For example, if you'd want to save some memory and time, you could use systemd-networkd instead of shell scripts and dhclient. systemd is used in constrai…

Someone disagreeing with you doesn't mean they are stupid, evil and part of a grand conspiracy to destroy everything you love. They just have different priorities. Why is this so hard for people to understand?

Re: Shall we fork Debian?

#113
Debian has always seemed to be about choice. You can even run it (for now, at least) on the FreeBSD kernel if you so choose. Obviously they are going to have to require systemd for Gnome 3.14+, but I see no reason not to allow installing a different init system for people managing headless LAMP servers via SSH, if there is an appropriate amount of developers willing to maintain the necessary packages for this.

Onto debianfork.org ... if history is any indication, naming it Pure Debian is only going to cause a world of pain for everyone. Forkers really need to stop trying to name their projects $superiorAdjective $projectName. That's never going to go over well with $projectName.

And if they do fork Debian, I sure hope they don't set the default UI font to Georgia 40. (I know it adapts to browser width. I don't like setting my browser to 200px width to read a webpage comfortably.)

Re: Shall we fork Debian?

#114
post #86
post #28

Or just shut up and put your efforts into maintaining https://packages.debian.org/jessie/systemd-shim Also, critique starts with "We like controlling the startup of the system with shell scripts that are readable".. How on earth is a systemd service file less readable then a hundreds of lines bash script? Also relevant: http://www.itwire.com/business-it-news/open-source/65684-deb...

Being a developer and being an admin are completely different jobs. A admin needs to know a dozen languages and codes in bash most of the time, they have a hand written folder with glued in scraps next to their terminal which explains why they did what, how and why. This folder has entries like "reboot three times, do an rain dance and run godHelpYou.bash as root" because that's the only way that you've found out how…

For people like this "do one thing and do it well" is the only way that you can beat the impossible complexity of a modern machine back into a running computer even some of the time. When you have a single point of failure which is a black box you're just back to windows land: restart the service, reboot the computer, reinstall the system.

For the developers, on the other hand, it might mean that some use case that is important for the admin is simply not yet implemented. The solution, as so often, is... drumroll to report a bug! Developers care about their users. Just talk to them.

Also, admins should realize that "reducing complexity" is a goal that they share with the developers. systemd is all about reducing complexity by implementing functionality the right way, on the right layer. For example, with systemd it's way easier to write a daemon, because it takes care of

* daemonizing: just stay in foreground

* logging: just output to stdout/stderr. journald will collect everything, and if you want, forward it to a classic syslog service

* startup: no more shell scripts required, just a simple service file

* supervision: just add "Restart=on-failure" to your service file. It also supports software watchdogs.

Re: Shall we fork Debian?

#115
post #2

The main reason for forking seems to be opposition to SystemD. Initially I was unconvinced but then I remembered the recent story of Lennart Poettering (one of the authors of SystemD) on The State Of Open Source Communities where he describes the hostility towards him personally https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8414859 In light of that, forking is a more civilised approach than bullying and threatening the author…

forking is a more civilised approach than bullying and threatening the author.

Absolutely, in that almost anything is. :)

But specifically, at this point I'd really welcome the anti-systemd ranters to just do some work that makes them feel happy, such as making a new distribution that has the exact init system they want.

I suspect that Debian would love for them to do that as well. Debian is in general welcoming of downstream distros since the downstream distros—if given proper care and feeding—often feed back useful improvements to Debian.

The problem here is that no one is actually doing a fork (yet). Some of the same loud, uninformed minority have just created a ranty web page that presents a skewed view of history and makes threats. It's just more of the same interminable mailing list snarks but in web page format.

Trying to put out and support an entire distribution may serve to broaden their minds as to the delicate position the distribution is in with regard to integrating upstream work into a coherent whole.

Sadly I'm not convinced that any enlightenment is going to be achieved because the people behind this web site admit that they haven't even got the time to become involved enough in Debian to have a vote, so I don't know where they're going to find the time to launch a non-toy distribution.

Re: Shall we fork Debian?

#116
post #72

I'm a devop, not a system administrator. I setup and administered a number of single machine web services for my customers along the years, almost all of them with Debian plus some Ubuntus recently. Database, application server, web server. Nothing fancy. I also use Ubuntu as my primary desktop (some sort of gnome fallback DE) after I removed a lot of cruft if comes with by default. From my experience what I need on…

systemd has a number of features which are of interest to server operators, especially those who use containers, which may well be many of us before long. Running systemd as pid 1 does not imply running a desktop environment. I have plenty of VPS customers running systemd as pid 1 in 512MiB RAM. Running systemd as pid 1 doesn't imply having every single binary and subsystem of systemd running. I would encourage you t…

I'll look into that. Thanks!

Re: Shall we fork Debian?

#117
Am I the only person who prefers systemd? Maybe because it's the only init system I've managed to get my head around. Other init systems seem so complicated. A config file vs a bash script is far easier and they all seem to require forking.

I only use Linux for servers so I may be unaware of a sane init system that works like systemd but isn't systemd. Until something like that appears, I'll stick to systemd.

Re: Shall we fork Debian?

#118
post #79
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can still use a keyscript (I do), it just need to be done in a different way. Instead of putting the configuration in /etc/crypttab, which confuses systemd indeed, you can still use the kernel cryptopts variable. For example, in the grub configuration add something like: cryptopts=source=/dev/ ,target=sdc5_crypt,keyscript=/lib/cryptsetup/scripts/passdev,key=/dev/ :/somdir/root.key Anf then in /etc/fstab use the /…

Thanks, I appreciate the hint, I should have noticed that a kernel parameter would be one way to do it (I'm familiar with writing initramfs-tools/hooks to make the existing keyscripts work). The fact remains though that a wheezy dist-upgrade is going to ruin your day badly enough to spend some time digging up your iDRAC/whatever creds (admittedly, nobody is going to dist-upgrade their prod servers without testing fir…

That's obviously a problem but more a migration script problem than a systemd problem, I'd say.

Re: Shall we fork Debian?

#120
post #11
post #4

From the article: We are excluded from voting on the issue: only few of us have the time and patience to interact with Debian on a voluntary basis. Using the same argument, forking would seem like a horrible idea if there isn't active maintainers.

I saw that as a giant red warning flag as well. Why would I expect them to maintain a fork and ensure it has full sysv init support, if they don't even have the time to engage in the current process? It's all a bit overdramatic anyway - there are heaps of Debian forks; they're called 'downstream distros'. Ubuntu is one.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN